A couple of days back, I was standing in the Express Checkout queue at a supermarket. When there was one person ahead of me and about 4 persons behind me, a person tried to jump the queue ahead of me without offering any explanation. Since he looked like an able-bodied man in his thirties, appeared to be alone (that is he was not accompanied by any elderly person, small child, pregnant woman or physically challenged person) and did not appear to be in any kind of emergency, I saw no reason to allow him to jump the queue. I put out my hand, thus blocking him, and stepped up to the counter. When he stood behind me, I was about to give him a piece of my mind, but I realized that there was not even a whisper of protest from any of the affected persons! I decided that, if the affected persons are not speaking up, why should I fight on their behalf?
I’ve had similar experiences a number of times in the past at various supermarkets and almost every time I’ve had to book a Platform Ticket at a railway station. Only 1 or 2 of the affected persons speak up, while the rest just remain silent.
On a couple of occasions, when I had been offered preferential treatment at banks, I had turned down the offer and had politely asked the bank employee to attend to customers according to their place in the queue. On those occasions also, the customers who were being bypassed did not speak up, but chose to remain silent.
In all these instances, the affected persons are fully aware that queue-jumping is taking place. Most of them complain about it in private. Yet, very few of them speak up. It must be noted here that the persons jumping the queue are common persons who, for reasons best known to themselves, think that their time is more valuable than that of the people standing in the queue.
Many people quietly tolerate high-handed behaviour from politicians, policemen, well-known persons, taxi/auto drivers, rowdies or any person who is perceived as being powerful and/or well-connected and/or uncouth. The reasoning is that protesting against such persons may invite a reaction that is worse than the original misbehaviour. I don’t agree with this reasoning, but I can understand a common person’s feeling of insecurity in the presence of people who are generally perceived to be powerful and/or well-connected and/or uncouth.
But, why do people tolerate high-handed behaviour from common persons who, until proved otherwise, are not powerful, well-connected or uncouth? Perhaps they assume that, if a person behaves in a high-handed manner, that person must be powerful and/or well-connected and/or uncouth, and that protesting against such a person may invite a reaction that is worse than the original misbehaviour.
I have seen that most instances of misbehaviour like queue-jumping can be prevented if just one person protests. In some instances, it is necessary for a few persons to protest, maybe rather forcefully. Yet, most people prefer to suffer in silence or, to quote Nagesh Kini in his Guest Post, “wait for an opportunity to shoot from others’ shoulders even for their own problems.”
If we value our rights, we must learn to protect them ourselves. If we are not willing to protect our own rights, we have no right to complain when these rights are trampled upon.